UK home secretary Amber Rudd thinks real people don't care about encryption

[Satisfoxy]

Yes, because I'm not a blind clueless follower that believes nothing the government does is wrong, I must not be real!

 

If you literally followed me around for a couple days you'd see I'm just your simple everyday normal mutha fugga. Screw good investigation work.

 

Transparency for everyone but the government.

[SSL]

2 hours ago, jaggysnake57 said:

im not saying people with nothing to hide dont want privacy im saying mos people dont care about end to end encryption in messaging services....and thats the only place i would stop it.

 

This argument makes no sense. While "regular" people may or may not care, terrorists absolutely do care and if a particular app stops offering encryption they will simply use other communication channels. It's that simple.

 

The only course that even remotely makes sense from your perspective would be to legally curtail the use of encryption - and this would be nearly impossible given that so many public encryption standards are available. And this presumes that encryption is even used by these people.

[Jinchu]

Just now, SSL said:

 

This argument makes no sense. While "regular" people may or may not care, terrorists absolutely do care and if a particular app stops offering encryption they will simply use other communication channels. It's that simple.

 

Most likely they don't. I mean the attacker in Paris (November 2015) used SMS. For government point of view that the worst terrorist could do. They didn't care. 

 

source: https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2015/11/paris-police-find-phone-with-unencrypted-sms-saying-lets-go-were-starting/

[Trik'Stari]

13 hours ago, Prysin said:

Or they move off platform. Look at Afghanistan and Irak. Taliban and Al Qaeda used human messengers that was loyal to the organisations goals, and only knew PARTS of the information. They then delivered to other messengers that was trusted. The CIA released a long whiny story about it because for YEARS they couldnt crack this network, even with waterboarding. Primarily because they never found a single piece of the puzzle with all the facts. Even the higher ups in terrorist orgs deliberatly make sure they dont know all the details incase they get caught. They desentralize all the stuff to the point where they "may be the encryption key to unmask the web and find the servers, but they dont actually store the info"

 

 

The encryption fight is simply another wretched tool for leftwing governments to chill freedom of speech by targeting legal citizens that has "nothing to hide but dissent for the established forces"

Funny how they use the exact same methods as the CIA and the KGB.

 

And I agree. The left wing are currently the ones with the most power to be abused, as they are claiming the moral high ground on everything and anything, and attacking the motives and character of anyone who disagrees with them to silence dissent.

 

Not that the right wing is much better, but they have far less social capital right now, especially when you consider that the left wing is what controls our schools and has been filling kids heads with their version of morality and reality for about 2 or 3 decades now. Which is ironic because it's the reason we're seeing a resurgence in the ultra-right wing (turns out when you vilify a person as being guilty of a crime from birth based on the color of their skin, they become an extremist lol) over the last two years. It's tragically hilarious to see that some of the left wing has become exactly the thing they hate.

 

Anyone who doubts this, go on youtube and watch what's happening at colleges across the country, watch videos of high school teachers telling kids that "all people of X race are racist etc". It's there, it's happening, and it's why things are getting worse.

[Jito463]

1 hour ago, Trik'Stari said:

Funny how they use the exact same methods as the CIA and the KGB.

Not really surprising.  We know that the Taliban was financed and trained by the CIA, as a means of weakening Russia (Russia was in Afghanistan in the...70''s? 80's?  Something like that).  And Al Qaeda was an offshoot of the Taliban, much like ISIS is an offshoot of AQ.  It's not a stretch to assume part of that training involved the passing of secret messages.

[Trik'Stari]

1 minute ago, Jito463 said:

Not really surprising.  We know that the Taliban was financed and trained by the CIA, as a means of weakening Russia (Russia was in Afghanistan in the 80's).  And Al Qaeda was an offshoot of the Taliban (much like ISIS is an offshoot of AQ).  It's not a stretch to assume part of that training involved the passing of secret messages.

That was my point. We're dealing with the problems of our own meddling.

 

Let's just pull out and let the area consume itself in stupidity instead of wasting money and lives. Hell, let the Saudi's and Iran deal with it. I really don't care. We're almost to the point of no longer needing their oil (supposedly)

[Jito463]

1 minute ago, Trik'Stari said:

That was my point. We're dealing with the problems of our own meddling.

Gotcha.  Context doesn't always translate well through text alone.  

 

2 minutes ago, Trik'Stari said:

Let's just pull out and let the area consume itself in stupidity instead of wasting money and lives.

The problem with that, is they're already fixated on us.  Pulling out now won't change anything.  They've been fixated on attacking and killing us for decades (recall the first WTC bombing in the 90's).  Pulling out of the region won't suddenly change their minds about us.

 

4 minutes ago, Trik'Stari said:

Hell, let the Saudi's and Iran deal with it. I really don't care. We're almost to the point of no longer needing their oil (supposedly)

If we switched to drilling for our own oil (which by all accounts, we have plenty trapped under "protected", government controlled land), we could be independent in just a few short years.  Unfortunately, this myth of oil being a non--renewable resource has kept the drilling approvals held up in Congress for ages.

 

And don't even get me started on the environmental whack jobs.

[Trik'Stari]

6 minutes ago, Jito463 said:

Gotcha.  Context doesn't always translate well through text alone.  

 

The problem with that, is they're already fixated on us.  Pulling out now won't change anything.  They've been fixated on attacking and killing us for decades (recall the first WTC bombing in the 90's).  Pulling out of the region won't suddenly change their minds about us.

 

If we switched to drilling for our own oil (which by all accounts, we have plenty trapped under "protected", government controlled land), we could be independent in just a few short years.  Unfortunately, this myth of oil being a non--renewable resource has kept the drilling approvals held up in Congress for ages.

 

And don't even get me started on the environmental whack jobs.

I can't think of any options other than bomb them into submission or leave them alone. Diplomacy doesn't work with extremists

[jaggysnake57]

15 hours ago, SSL said:

 

This argument makes no sense. While "regular" people may or may not care, terrorists absolutely do care and if a particular app stops offering encryption they will simply use other communication channels. It's that simple.

 

The only course that even remotely makes sense from your perspective would be to legally curtail the use of encryption - and this would be nearly impossible given that so many public encryption standards are available. And this presumes that encryption is even used by these people.

it makes perfect sense. in fact you are making my point. you are making it harder for terrorists, or any criminal organisation to operator by removing the easiest methods of communicating. its really quite simple and a fundamental tactic used across the world.

 

and you only have to stop encryption in apps like whats app......again not that hard.

[LAwLz]

3 hours ago, jaggysnake57 said:

it makes perfect sense. in fact you are making my point. you are making it harder for terrorists, or any criminal organisation to operator by removing the easiest methods of communicating. its really quite simple and a fundamental tactic used across the world.

 

and you only have to stop encryption in apps like whats app......again not that hard.

Except you would not remove the easiest method of communication for them, because removing E2EE chat programs is impossible.

I would like for you to respond to my post here, which links to an open source program which works just as easily as whatsapp, but is less centralized.

 

22 hours ago, LAwLz said:

I want to ask you something and I want you to answer honestly.

What do you think would happen if E2EE chats were banned? I assume that you are OK with some encryption since you said it was the only place you would stop, but why are you so against that particular application of encryption?

 

Is it because terrorists use it to communicate? Because there is quite little evidence to support that theory. I don't remember exact numbers, but the vast majority of criminal communications are not done over E2EE channels. They are done over burner phones, in person, on unencrypted services, and so on.

 

Even if it was outlawed, there would be nothing to stop terrorists from just switching to another program. It would maybe taken them a day to create their own system which was decentralized and could not be blocked. You can not prevent someone from just downloading and spreading the source code of a free (as in freedom) program.

Here is the source code for a messaging program (including the server, which means anyone can host the backbone of the network) they could switch to if they wanted. Wire is a great program by the way, highly recommended.

 

 

So most terrorists would not be affected at all by a ban, and those who would be affected could just switch to something else which would be impossible to shut down.

So why do you want E2EE messaging to be banned?